Glaser v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1932
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently April 1987
18 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Fletcher v. State · Unruh v. State ex rel. Baum · Scheerer v. State · Batten v. State · Selby v. State
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ . . . The law applicable to criminal pleading in this jurisdiction forbids the joining ‘of separate and distinct offenses created by separate and distinct sections of the statute and separate statutes’, or offenses committed at different times, in the same count. (Cases cited.) . . . But where, as here, the offense charged consists of one or more of the forbidden acts committed at the same time and included in a single section of the statute, and the punishment is the same for one or all of the offenses named, a single count charging more than one conjunctively will not be bad for duplicity. (Cases cited.) “The precise question, in principle, now under consideration was before this court in Selby v. State (1904), 161 Ind. 667, 672 , 69 N. E. 463 , and Bruner v. State (1929), 201 Ind. 33 , 164 N. E. 272 , and in both cases it was held that a charge of forgery and knowingly uttering a forged instrument may be pleaded in a single count when tied together conjunctively, when both offenses are charged ‘as constituting a single transaction and for which but a single penalty can be exacted.’ The pleading at bar is sufficient to withstand a motion to quash.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. State
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.